Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 19.djvu/412

trict of the Landsend in Cornwall.’ In 1820 he married a daughter of John Burgh, esq., H.E.I.C., who died in 1851, and by whom he had one son, who survived him. In 1822 he removed to Chichester, as successor to Dr. (afterwards Sir William) Burnett [q. v.], who had recently removed to London. Here he had for about a year a rival in Dr. John Conolly [q. v.], but as there was not room for two physicians Conolly left the place, continuing, however, to be his intimate friend and literary co-operator. Forbes had a good practice at Chichester, amounting frequently to 1,500l. a year, and was very popular, both as a man and as a physician. He was an active supporter of the charitable, scientific, and literary institutions of the place, and especially was mainly instrumental in founding the infirmary in 1827, which was the first general hospital established in the county. His principal professional works were undertaken and partly completed at Chichester. He had in 1821 published a translation of Laennec's great work on ‘Mediate Auscultation,’ with the description of the newly invented stethoscope. Forbes executed his translation well, and it reached a fifth edition in 1838; but it is chiefly creditable to him as showing how much he was in advance of most of the physicians of the day, by many of whom Laennec's great discovery was treated with contempt and ridicule. It is curious, after the lapse of nearly seventy years, to see how entirely Forbes's anticipations (as expressed in his preface) have been falsified by the result, but only because the instrument has obtained a success so far exceeding his most sanguine expectations. Although certain that the stethoscope will be acknowledged to be one of the greatest discoveries in medicine, he doubts whether it will ever come into general use. In 1824 he followed up the subject by a translation of Auenbrugger's remarkable work, ‘Inventum novum ex Percussione Thoracis Humani ut signo abstrusos interni pectoris morbos detegendi’ (Vienna, 1761), which was comparatively unknown in England. He added to the translation some ‘Original Cases … illustrating the Use of the Stethoscope and Percussion in the Diagnosis of Diseases of the Chest.’ He next undertook, in conjunction with Drs. Tweedie and John Conolly, the ‘Cyclopædia of Practical Medicine,’ which was begun in 1832, issued in parts with remarkable regularity, and finished in four large octavo volumes in 1835. It was the work of sixty-seven writers, including some of the most eminent physicians of the day. Forbes himself was said to be ‘the life of the work,’ and contributed to it several excellent articles, besides a ‘Select Medical Bibliography,’ which was afterwards published in a separate form (1835). When this great work was nearly completed, Forbes planned a continuation, with improvements, of the ‘Medical Quarterly Review,’ in hopes of supplying the profession with a journal of a higher critical and scientific character than was then in existence. He induced many of the writers in the ‘Cyclopædia’ to contribute articles to the ‘British and Foreign Medical Review’ from the beginning, and John Conolly's name appeared with his own in the title-page of the first seven volumes. The numbers appeared quarterly; the first was published in January 1836. For four years Forbes continued to reside at Chichester, but in 1840 he removed to London, chiefly with the object of improving the ‘Review.’ This move no doubt entailed upon him a considerable pecuniary loss, for he could never expect at the age of fifty-three (even though, through the influence of his friend, Sir James Clark, he was appointed physician to the queen's household) to obtain a London practice equal to what he had enjoyed at Chichester. But he was at this time entirely engrossed in the ‘Review,’ the establishment of which was indeed a great event both in his own life and also in medical literature. It soon became the leading medical journal in this country, and its reputation spread not only all over Europe but also in America, where it was reprinted. It continued in existence for twelve years, and was at last terminated by himself when the circulation began to fall off continuously. In the last number (October 1847) he gives a very interesting history of the ‘Review’ from its beginning, from which it appears that, though it was for about eight years self-supporting, yet altogether he lost about 500l. by the undertaking. Notwithstanding this he completed the work by the addition of an excellent index, which entailed upon him a considerable expense. This he dedicated to 264 old contributors, friends, and readers, who had combined to present him with a memorial of their approval and esteem in reference to his management of the ‘Review.’ The circulation of the ‘Review’ was never so large as had been reached in former years by its rival, Johnson's ‘Medico-Chirurgical Review,’ and its discontinuance was no doubt connected with the offence taken by the profession at his article (January 1846) entitled ‘Homœopathy, Allopathy, and “Young Physic.”’ The article was probably much misunderstood, and the outcry swelled by writers who had been personally aggrieved by other articles in the ‘Review.’ But it is admitted,